Please help us continue to provide you with free, quality journalism by turning off your ad blocker on our site.

Thank you for signing in.

If this is your first time registering, please check your inbox for more information about the benefits of your Forbes account and what you can do next!

I agree to receive occasional updates and announcements about Forbes products and services. You may opt out at any time.

I'd like to receive the Forbes Daily Dozen newsletter to get the top 12 headlines every morning.

Forbes takes privacy seriously and is committed to transparency. We will never share your email address with third parties without your permission. By signing in, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Statement.

The Herero-Nama Genocide: The Story Of A Recognized Crime, Apologies Issued And Silence Ever Since

The word genocide and its legal definition were coined after World War II (WWII) and in light of the obvious mass atrocities committed by the Nazi regime. Despite having a relatively new name the crime had existed for decades if not centuries before. Genocide had been committed long before WWII, however, at the time it was a nameless crime, there were no known words capable of capturing the severity of the act.

The Herero and Nama genocide is one such example. It took place between 1904 and 1908 in German-occupied South West Africa (currently the territory of Namibia). A foreign colony in Africa, it was rife with extortion, abuse and enslavement.

A crowd awaits the return of the Herero and Nama skulls from Germany, at sunrise at the... [+] international airport on October 4, 2011, outside Windhoek. (Photo credit: BRIGITTE WEIDLICH/AFP/Getty Images)

In January 1904, the Herero people, led by Samuel Maharero, and the Nama people, led by Hendrik Witbooi, rebelled against the German colonial occupation. Their rebellion stood no chance of success against the oppressive German occupation of the region. In response, German General Lothar von Trotha ordered that ‘within the German borders every Herero, with or without a gun, with or without cattle, will be shot.’ Many were killed in combat, including during the Battle of Waterberg. Others died of dehydration in the desert. Those imprisoned in concentration camps died of disease and exhaustion. These various methods were used to respond to the failed Herero and Nama rebellion. They resulted in the annihilation of approximately 80% of the Herero people and 50% of the Nama.

Eight decades after the atrocities, the UN Whitaker Report determined that the atrocities constituted an attempt to exterminate the Herero and Nama people in German South West Africa. The report named the genocide of the Herero and Nama people as one of the biggest genocides of the 20th century (it stands among 'the Ottoman massacre of Armenians in 1915-1916, the Ukrainian pogrom of Jews in 1919, the Tutsi massacre of Hutu in Burundi in 1965 and 1972, the Paraguayan massacre of Ache Indians prior to 1974, the Khmer Rouge massacre in Kampuchea between 1975 and 1978, the contemporary Iranian killings of Baha’is, and the Holocaust').

In 2004, the German government formally recognised the colonial atrocities perpetrated in German South West Africa and issued an apology. However, at the time, the German government ruled out any reparations for the survivors or their families. In 2015, the German government officially recognised the atrocities to constitute Völkermord (genocide) but again, ruled out any reparations.

Even before the German government’s formal recognition of the atrocities as genocide, in 2001, representatives of the Herero people filed a lawsuit in the United States. The lawsuit identified the German government and Deutsche Bank (the commercial entity that financed the German government and other companies in the German South West Africa) as the defendants. The lawsuit was unsuccessful. In 2017, Herero and Nama organisations filed yet another lawsuit in the US (in New York), this time under the Alien Tort Statute. The Alien Tort Statute equips district courts with ‘original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.’ The Alien Tort Statute has been read to give rise to a global remedy for breaches of international law(Filartiga v. Pena-Irala, Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain). However, in 2013, in the case of Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, the US Supreme Court unanimously confirmed that the Alien Tort Statute does not apply to crimes that do not ‘touch and concern’ the United States and hence such claims are not actionable under the statute. This would suggest that the US courts do not have the required jurisdiction to hear the case of the genocide committed against the Herero and Nama people. However, Ken McCallion acting on behalf of the plaintiffs, indicated that Kiobel and later decisions leave ‘the door open’ for the US courts to gain the extraterritorial jurisdiction over cases of genocide.

The lawsuit follows negotiations between the German and Namibian governments that allegedly rule outreparations for more than 100,000 victims of genocide. This means that even if Namibia is awarded reparations, they may not reach the indigenous people or the families of the victims and survivors of the atrocities committed between 1904-1908. The sum of the reparations sought in the lawsuit is not specified.

The difficulties encountered by Herero and Nama communities are not unusual. However, it does not mean that they will not be successful. Indeed, there are precedents for such reparation claims. For example, Germany has paid war reparations to survivors of the Holocaust; the US has paid reparations to the Japanese-American Internees; the UK has promised to pay the Mau Mau people tortured under its rule in Kenya. However, some similar reparations claims are strongly objected. The best example is that of the Poles trying to claim reparations for the Nazi atrocities committed during WWII.

While some groups have been successful in obtaining reparations, others have struggled for decades and there appears little hope. The struggles experienced by the survivors and the families of the victims in accessing reparations for mass atrocities suggest a greater need for a more uniform and universal approach to the issue. Most importantly, in discussion with governments about such claims for reparations, the affected communities cannot be excluded. Victims, survivors and their families must be put first.

Ewelina U. Ochab is a human rights advocate, author and co-founder of the Coalition for Genocide Response. Ochab works on the topic of genocide, with specific focus on

…

Ewelina U. Ochab is a human rights advocate, author and co-founder of the Coalition for Genocide Response. Ochab works on the topic of genocide, with specific focus on persecution of religious minorities around the world, with main projects including Daesh genocide in Syria and Iraq, Boko Haram atrocities in West Africa, and the situation of religious minorities in South Asia. Ochab has written over 30 UN reports (including Universal Periodic Review reports) and has made oral and written submissions at the Human Rights Council sessions and the UN Forum on Minority Issues. Ochab is currently working on her PhD in international law, human rights and medical ethics. Ochab authored the initiative and proposal to establish the UN International Day Commemorating Victims and Survivors of Religious Persecution. The initiative has led to the establishment of the UN International Day Commemorating the Victims of Acts of Violence Based on Religion or Belief on August 22. Follow @EwelinaUO